Jump to content

Putting a cache on private land?


hunter61073

Recommended Posts

I have a VERY ticked off friend. He has had his dogs going nuts for a few months, and could not figure out why. He was out looking for felled trees for this winter heating, and he spotted a lady wandering around on his wooded property. He asked her what she was doing there... Long story short.... He removed the cache, called the police and found out his rights.

WHY do people put these caches on private land without permission? This only gives this fun aftertime a bad name.

I told him all about it, and he understands the idea... but complains about people who go out anddrive all day just looking for these things when gas prices are outrageous. I see his point....

I go out on the weekends... with MAYBE 2 or 3 to find... all in a close area. I do not goaround looking all over a 3 county area looking for as many as I canin one day.

I guess all I am asking or saying is... please respect landowners rights... or this hobby will go to the wayside real fast.

Link to comment

I have a VERY ticked off friend. He has had his dogs going nuts for a few months, and could not figure out why. He was out looking for felled trees for this winter heating, and he spotted a lady wandering around on his wooded property. He asked her what she was doing there... Long story short.... He removed the cache, called the police and found out his rights.

WHY do people put these caches on private land without permission? This only gives this fun aftertime a bad name.

I told him all about it, and he understands the idea... but complains about people who go out anddrive all day just looking for these things when gas prices are outrageous. I see his point....

I go out on the weekends... with MAYBE 2 or 3 to find... all in a close area. I do not goaround looking all over a 3 county area looking for as many as I canin one day.

I guess all I am asking or saying is... please respect landowners rights... or this hobby will go to the wayside real fast.

+1 in regards to private property.

 

edited to complete idea

Edited by captnemo
Link to comment

This not in direct reference to the OP...so, please do not take it that way...

 

But, don't blame the finders for this. Cache Owners should know about the land in which they place caches. I was on one hunt this weekend where we were asked to pull the cache by the land owner. We did and we were glad to spend some time with the land owner and getting everything straightened out...

Link to comment

Don't be too cross with the seekers. The cache owner should have asked for permission. Has the cache been archived? If not folks will keep looking for it. Even if archived some may still have it loaded on their GPS.

 

As for driving all over the place we do it all the time. Sometimes driving hours just to find one or two caches. But we don't go to movies or ball games. We don't get why someone would spend the money to watch a NFL game. We could visit many new places for what the tickets cost. Not to mention parking, beverages, snacks and whatever. $25-$50 in gas doesn't sound like all that much money for a full days entertainment.

Link to comment

I have a VERY ticked off friend. He has had his dogs going nuts for a few months, and could not figure out why. He was out looking for felled trees for this winter heating, and he spotted a lady wandering around on his wooded property. He asked her what she was doing there... Long story short.... He removed the cache, called the police and found out his rights.

WHY do people put these caches on private land without permission? This only gives this fun aftertime a bad name.

I told him all about it, and he understands the idea... but complains about people who go out anddrive all day just looking for these things when gas prices are outrageous. I see his point....

I go out on the weekends... with MAYBE 2 or 3 to find... all in a close area. I do not goaround looking all over a 3 county area looking for as many as I canin one day.

I guess all I am asking or saying is... please respect landowners rights... or this hobby will go to the wayside real fast.

 

My initial assumption would be that it was placed there by mistake. Was the land posted? Does it border on some sort of public land where caches are generally accepted? Too many unanswered questions.

 

>> but complains about people who go out anddrive all day just looking for these things when gas prices are outrageous. I see his point.... :blink: You do?

 

The private property thing is his business. What people chose to burn gas on, however, is not.

Link to comment

I have a VERY ticked off friend. He has had his dogs going nuts for a few months, and could not figure out why. He was out looking for felled trees for this winter heating, and he spotted a lady wandering around on his wooded property. He asked her what she was doing there... Long story short.... He removed the cache, called the police and found out his rights.

WHY do people put these caches on private land without permission? This only gives this fun aftertime a bad name.

I told him all about it, and he understands the idea... but complains about people who go out anddrive all day just looking for these things when gas prices are outrageous. I see his point....

I go out on the weekends... with MAYBE 2 or 3 to find... all in a close area. I do not goaround looking all over a 3 county area looking for as many as I canin one day.

I guess all I am asking or saying is... please respect landowners rights... or this hobby will go to the wayside real fast.

 

My initial assumption would be that it was placed there by mistake. Was the land posted? Does it border on some sort of public land where caches are generally accepted? Too many unanswered questions.

 

>> but complains about people who go out anddrive all day just looking for these things when gas prices are outrageous. I see his point.... :blink: You do?

 

The private property thing is his business. What people chose to burn gas on, however, is not.

 

Yeah, I'd love to see the cache listing. My guess? Wooded, unposted property. Probably of the variety where the owner thought it was a no-brainer/never needed to bother posting it. But anything anyone puts anywhere and gets it posted on this website is going to have a endless parade of smiley seekers.

 

Smiley seekers whom by the way, I would not absolve of any blame. Knowing this websites "look the other way and assume permission" policy, I have walked away from many caches that had obvious private property issues. Or ignored them from Google earth.

Link to comment

I have a VERY ticked off friend. He has had his dogs going nuts for a few months, and could not figure out why. He was out looking for felled trees for this winter heating, and he spotted a lady wandering around on his wooded property. He asked her what she was doing there... Long story short.... He removed the cache, called the police and found out his rights.

WHY do people put these caches on private land without permission? This only gives this fun aftertime a bad name.

I told him all about it, and he understands the idea... but complains about people who go out anddrive all day just looking for these things when gas prices are outrageous. I see his point....

I go out on the weekends... with MAYBE 2 or 3 to find... all in a close area. I do not goaround looking all over a 3 county area looking for as many as I canin one day.

I guess all I am asking or saying is... please respect landowners rights... or this hobby will go to the wayside real fast.

 

First point. Absolutley right, nobody should place a cache on private land and the Geocaching community ought to be able to sensibly police itself to ensure these sort of problems are reported and dealt with as quickly as possible. I guess unless you post the cache details then it is difficult to assess how this came about in this instance.

 

Second point. Don't agree. People travel all over the world pursuing pastimes they enjoy so why not drive for a couple of hours and visit lots of different places and go on a fantastic hike, in a new area, experiencing different countryside. Sometimes you will go for the site itself and do a few caches whilst visiting or sometimes you will go for the cache and (hopefully) find a new area which you enjoy. The more stops you do the more interesting the day (hopefully) as long as you have done a bit of research first.

Link to comment

I have a VERY ticked off friend. He has had his dogs going nuts for a few months, and could not figure out why. He was out looking for felled trees for this winter heating, and he spotted a lady wandering around on his wooded property. He asked her what she was doing there... Long story short.... He removed the cache, called the police and found out his rights.

WHY do people put these caches on private land without permission? This only gives this fun aftertime a bad name.

I told him all about it, and he understands the idea... but complains about people who go out anddrive all day just looking for these things when gas prices are outrageous. I see his point....

I go out on the weekends... with MAYBE 2 or 3 to find... all in a close area. I do not goaround looking all over a 3 county area looking for as many as I canin one day.

I guess all I am asking or saying is... please respect landowners rights... or this hobby will go to the wayside real fast.

 

My initial assumption would be that it was placed there by mistake. Was the land posted? Does it border on some sort of public land where caches are generally accepted? Too many unanswered questions.

 

>> but complains about people who go out anddrive all day just looking for these things when gas prices are outrageous. I see his point.... :blink: You do?

 

The private property thing is his business. What people chose to burn gas on, however, is not.

 

Yeah, I'd love to see the cache listing. My guess? Wooded, unposted property. Probably of the variety where the owner thought it was a no-brainer/never needed to bother posting it. But anything anyone puts anywhere and gets it posted on this website is going to have a endless parade of smiley seekers.

 

Smiley seekers whom by the way, I would not absolve of any blame. Knowing this websites "look the other way and assume permission" policy, I have walked away from many caches that had obvious private property issues. Or ignored them from Google earth.

 

The name on the cache is ....slbens or slloens ... left there on 10/7/11. It is in the area by Mauston,Wi.

Edited by hunter61073
Link to comment

I have a VERY ticked off friend. He has had his dogs going nuts for a few months, and could not figure out why. He was out looking for felled trees for this winter heating, and he spotted a lady wandering around on his wooded property. He asked her what she was doing there... Long story short.... He removed the cache, called the police and found out his rights.

WHY do people put these caches on private land without permission? This only gives this fun aftertime a bad name.

I told him all about it, and he understands the idea... but complains about people who go out anddrive all day just looking for these things when gas prices are outrageous. I see his point....

I go out on the weekends... with MAYBE 2 or 3 to find... all in a close area. I do not goaround looking all over a 3 county area looking for as many as I canin one day.

I guess all I am asking or saying is... please respect landowners rights... or this hobby will go to the wayside real fast.

 

My initial assumption would be that it was placed there by mistake. Was the land posted? Does it border on some sort of public land where caches are generally accepted? Too many unanswered questions.

 

>> but complains about people who go out anddrive all day just looking for these things when gas prices are outrageous. I see his point.... :blink: You do?

 

The private property thing is his business. What people chose to burn gas on, however, is not.

 

Yeah, I'd love to see the cache listing. My guess? Wooded, unposted property. Probably of the variety where the owner thought it was a no-brainer/never needed to bother posting it. But anything anyone puts anywhere and gets it posted on this website is going to have a endless parade of smiley seekers.

 

Smiley seekers whom by the way, I would not absolve of any blame. Knowing this websites "look the other way and assume permission" policy, I have walked away from many caches that had obvious private property issues. Or ignored them from Google earth.

 

The name on the cache is ....slbens or slloens ... left there on 10/7/11. It is in the area by Mauston,Wi.

 

**UPDATE** ... I found the user, and sent an Email on here. I am hoping the couple will either call him, or go and talk to him to get things figured out. Happy Hunting!!!

Link to comment

I have a VERY ticked off friend. He has had his dogs going nuts for a few months, and could not figure out why. He was out looking for felled trees for this winter heating, and he spotted a lady wandering around on his wooded property. He asked her what she was doing there... Long story short.... He removed the cache, called the police and found out his rights.

WHY do people put these caches on private land without permission? This only gives this fun aftertime a bad name.

I told him all about it, and he understands the idea... but complains about people who go out anddrive all day just looking for these things when gas prices are outrageous. I see his point....

I go out on the weekends... with MAYBE 2 or 3 to find... all in a close area. I do not goaround looking all over a 3 county area looking for as many as I canin one day.

I guess all I am asking or saying is... please respect landowners rights... or this hobby will go to the wayside real fast.

 

My initial assumption would be that it was placed there by mistake. Was the land posted? Does it border on some sort of public land where caches are generally accepted? Too many unanswered questions.

 

>> but complains about people who go out anddrive all day just looking for these things when gas prices are outrageous. I see his point.... :blink: You do?

 

The private property thing is his business. What people chose to burn gas on, however, is not.

 

Yeah, I'd love to see the cache listing. My guess? Wooded, unposted property. Probably of the variety where the owner thought it was a no-brainer/never needed to bother posting it. But anything anyone puts anywhere and gets it posted on this website is going to have a endless parade of smiley seekers.

 

Smiley seekers whom by the way, I would not absolve of any blame. Knowing this websites "look the other way and assume permission" policy, I have walked away from many caches that had obvious private property issues. Or ignored them from Google earth.

 

The name on the cache is ....slbens or slloens ... left there on 10/7/11. It is in the area by Mauston,Wi.

 

Don't see it. Is it archived now? the first word is a username, and the first cache that comes up in that town is by them, but I don't see where this was their cache.

Link to comment

It doesn’t really matter if land is posted or not, before placing a cache the cache owner should stay off private land unless they have permission from the land owner. If they don’t know whose land they are on then they should stay off until they find out.

Just because a cache owner is thoughtless enough to palace a cache on private land without permission doesn’t give finders the right to go after it. Finders have the same responsibility to know whose land they are on and have the proper permission.

Link to comment

 

The name on the cache is ....slbens or slloens ... left there on 10/7/11. It is in the area by Mauston,Wi.

 

Don't see it. Is it archived now? the first word is a username, and the first cache that comes up in that town is by them, but I don't see where this was their cache.

 

The cache owner is "slbens". Looks to be a responsible cache owner, with a couple of caches where the write-up says with the permission of the land owner or manager, and that person's name is on the cache page, too.

 

Like this one, for example:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=cc73ce99-3d34-49d7-8663-5c07dff8b46e

 

I don't see any "placed" date of 10/7/11, though.

 

People sure do like to jump to conclusions around here.

Edited by Pup Patrol
Link to comment

Hopefully by Emailing this person... He will make things right in some way. All I can say is that.... people out in those parts do NOT take a liking to people wandering abouts on their land, and they tend to shoot first and ask questions later. Just by the postings left from all of this on his page.... people are not very happy, and they have even said they will let the dogs loose if they see anyone on their land from now on.

I think it is a sad thing... people can be so narrow minded, and not even open themselves to the thought of recreational outings in this manner... as long as it is OK with the landowner.

 

Maybe this is why I have never placed a cache of my own?????

Link to comment

Hopefully by Emailing this person... He will make things right in some way. All I can say is that.... people out in those parts do NOT take a liking to people wandering abouts on their land, and they tend to shoot first and ask questions later. Just by the postings left from all of this on his page.... people are not very happy, and they have even said they will let the dogs loose if they see anyone on their land from now on.

I think it is a sad thing... people can be so narrow minded, and not even open themselves to the thought of recreational outings in this manner... as long as it is OK with the landowner.

 

Maybe this is why I have never placed a cache of my own?????

 

Shooting first or letting the dogs loose is likely to get the landowner in more trouble than the wayward cachers. Trespassing is not normally a capital offense.

Link to comment

I am just conveying the feelings of the surrounding landowners about this specific incident. We are talking redneck wooded areas here people. They tend to go by their own rules. This specific landowner is an active member of the armed forces, and is soon to be going to Afghanistan... I personally would not want to be on his bad side. :ph34r:

He is a good friend of mine, just looking to protect his family... would you not do the same?? You MUST look at both sides of the coin here. Some people just think geocaching is the dumbest thing ever thought up, while others cannot think of a more fun thing to do.

Don't attack the messenger!!!! I am just here to convey others thoughts... that I personally am reading about this... froooom the daaaark siiiiide. :P

Link to comment

Not knowing any details about where this particular cache was placed, I will say that in my area of the country (Northwest) there is a lot of public land that boarders private land and if you are out hiking, caching, hunting or whatever it can be very easy to cross over on to UNPOSTED private property. Property owners do have some responsibility to post their property no matter how far out away from “civilization” they are. I don’t know exactly how it works, but if a property owner (in Idaho) has a public waterway running through their property they have some very specific ways they must mark their property to keep fisherman from crossing to get to the waterway, AND if a fisherman comes down (or up) river from an accessible location they cannot make the fisherman (or boater, rafter ext..) leave as long as the water user stays below any high water mark or in the water. You can even camp on the property along the river if you are below the high water mark.

 

All this being said, I agree that if you are going to hide a cache, make sure you know where you are hidding it.

Link to comment

We all respect your friend's deeply held beliefs about property ownership and the right to be left alone on one's homestead. I for one have fought dearly for those rights. But we're also trying to run a civil society here, that depends on giving people the benefit of the doubt. There is a balance that has stood the test of time everywhere in the US, no matter where "those parts" happen to be. Here's what the law says in your particular "those parts:"

 

In Illinois as with most states, a person is guilty of trespassing only after they have been notified and given the opportunity to freely leave the property. The state code says a person is guilty of trespass only when he/she:

 

  • "enters upon the land of another, after receiving, prior to such entry, notice from the owner or occupant that such entry is forbidden;" or
  • "remains upon the land of another, after receiving notice from the owner or occupant to depart."

The key point here is that generally in the US, it is not illegal to enter private land. It is only illegal to enter or remain knowingly, after having been notified. Posting written notices only applies if the area is enclosed and marked at the principal entrances, or if not enclosed, is marked sufficiently that any person could reasonably see written notice from his point of entrance onto the property. The burden of proof that a trespasser should have reasonably seen the signs rests upon the complainant. In general, force cannot be used to eject them unless they refuse to leave, and if they attempt to leave, force absolutely cannot be used to detain them.

 

I'm an animal lover, so I feel deeply sorry for any dog sent after me, they're going to have a rough day with me. And being an Army sniper and special operations soldier, I feel equally sorry for the people who shot first. I haven't always gotten the first shot. I have however always gotten the last. :rolleyes:

Edited by Sky King 36
Link to comment

I'd say the CO needs to clearly spell out where the cache is not in his geocache profile to prevent this situation. Anything less is careless.

 

I found that this type of situation happens in my area a lot. Generally these geocaches get removed; unfortunately it always seems to happen by the same CO (bad apple) placing these caches without permission.

 

CAN'T Groundspeak STEP IN AND REVOKE THE CACHE OWNERS RIGHTS TO PLANT FUTURE GEOCACHES IF THIS BEHAVIOR PERSISTS? OR WOULD THAT HURT THE SPORT WORSE THAN UNINTENTIONAL TRESPASSING BY UNKNOWING GEOCACHERS.

Edited by TorgtheViking
Link to comment

Should the cache owner have researched the ownership of the property?

 

Yes. Absolutely.

 

Should the reviewer who published the cache have researched the ownership of the property?

 

Yes. Absolutely.

 

Should the property owner put up a few signs (or even a fence...maybe) if they don't want people wandering around on their property?

 

Yes. Most certainly.

 

Does anyone have any business questioning how I spend my leisure time or disposable income?

 

No.

Link to comment

Hopefully by Emailing this person... He will make things right in some way. All I can say is that.... people out in those parts do NOT take a liking to people wandering abouts on their land, and they tend to shoot first and ask questions later. Just by the postings left from all of this on his page.... people are not very happy, and they have even said they will let the dogs loose if they see anyone on their land from now on.

I think it is a sad thing... people can be so narrow minded, and not even open themselves to the thought of recreational outings in this manner... as long as it is OK with the landowner.

 

Maybe this is why I have never placed a cache of my own?????

 

By "those parts"... do you mean, Wisconsin? My neighboring state? The Shoot First, Ask Questions Later State?

 

Sorry, I have never heard of anybody shot for trespassing in Wisconsin, and unless they had reason to believe their life was in jeopardy, they are probably behind bars right now. That is a tad more serious than somebody hunting tupperware on your land.

Link to comment

There have been a few caches I have not gone looking for after I have seen a no trespassing sign that made it look as though the cache was on private property. Two of those were on public land and I was approaching from the wrong area, across private property. Another one I sent a message to the cache owner and he immediately disabled his cache to look into the situation. At that one, the cache was placed on land bordering a public park and the no trespassing sign looked new. Since I was travelling through the area I never looked again at that cache to see what became of the situation. I think I will have to go see what has happened to it.

Link to comment

In Illinois as with most states, a person is guilty of trespassing only after they have been notified and given the opportunity to freely leave the property. The state code says a person is guilty of trespass only when he/she:

 

  • "enters upon the land of another, after receiving, prior to such entry, notice from the owner or occupant that such entry is forbidden;" or
  • "remains upon the land of another, after receiving notice from the owner or occupant to depart."

The key point here is that generally in the US, it is not illegal to enter private land. It is only illegal to enter or remain knowingly, after having been notified. s:

 

This is not always true. In California it is an infraction to enter any land that is fenced, or properly posted without fencing, without regard to whether you are asked to leave. It can rise to a misdemeanor if you remain on land after being asked to leave. Even in Illinois, you can violate the law if "written notice forbidding such entry has been conspicuously posted or exhibited at the main entrance to such land or the forbidden part thereof." Therefore, a notice at the entrance will be deemed sufficient to provide you warning even if you enter by another way. And of course if you enter into an agricultural field or orchard . . .

 

It can be important to know the rules. A nearby cache was placed on private property, behind fenced land that was posted in part. I decided not to look for it in light of the above law. But other cachers did. Neither the cache owner or the reviewer took any interest in the problem, but it was archived after a run in with the angry property owner. Luckily, no one was arrested.

Edited by geodarts
Link to comment

I am just conveying the feelings of the surrounding landowners about this specific incident. We are talking redneck wooded areas here people. They tend to go by their own rules. This specific landowner is an active member of the armed forces, and is soon to be going to Afghanistan... I personally would not want to be on his bad side. :ph34r:

He is a good friend of mine, just looking to protect his family... would you not do the same?? You MUST look at both sides of the coin here. Some people just think geocaching is the dumbest thing ever thought up, while others cannot think of a more fun thing to do.

Don't attack the messenger!!!! I am just here to convey others thoughts... that I personally am reading about this... froooom the daaaark siiiiide. :P

 

After that post, I will attack the messenger! You are trying to tell us that we need to fear this man more because he is a member of the armed forces, and is soon to be going to Afghanistan? You are trying to tell us that people in that area tend to shoot first, ask questions later? Naw.... I'm no longer buying this. Your credibility has gone out the window with me.

Link to comment

I'd say the CO needs to clearly spell out where the cache is not in his geocache profile to prevent this situation. Anything less is careless.

 

I found that this type of situation happens in my area a lot. Generally these geocaches get removed; unfortunately it always seems to happen by the same CO (bad apple) placing these caches without permission.

 

CAN'T Groundspeak STEP IN AND REVOKE THE CACHE OWNERS RIGHTS TO PLANT FUTURE GEOCACHES IF THIS BEHAVIOR PERSISTS? OR WOULD THAT HURT THE SPORT WORSE THAN UNINTENTIONAL TRESPASSING BY UNKNOWING GEOCACHERS.

 

I'd advise you to take this thread with a grain or three of salt, until more details emerge.

Link to comment

This is not always true. In California it is an infraction to enter any land that is fenced, or properly posted without fencing, without regard to whether you are asked to leave. It can rise to a misdemeanor or more if you remain on land after being asked to leave.

The key word is UNKNOWNGLY.

 

This means, if it is posted private property, or there is a fence, you could not have not knowingly entered private property. At least, with a fence there you'd have a hard time convincing the Judge you didn't.

 

I've never once been questioned for private property in PA though. For example, once I ran into a police officer on private property, he waved at me as he was using the land to give his dog a place to urinate. I waved back. I suppose at that point he would've arrested the 10 people ruining the land on ATV then me just passing through if he really cared.

 

Most of the private property I go on is not in use by anyone other then people trespassing. Just miles of trails in the woods made from ATVers and dog walkers from people living nearby (This is a different set of back-trails than the one the cop waved to me at). I actually hid a cache here not realizing it was private property until I went to check on the cache and noticed a sign. I will still go on the land, mostly because they will go after the ATV and Dirtbikers before me, but I don't want to get myself on the bad side of reviewers.

 

To make matters even more funny, I was riding my bike with a few friends the other day, and it said, "private property trespassers will be prosecuted", (Another set of woods usd by ATVers and Dirtbikers...) and there was a couple dirt bikers on the other side of the fence. As a joke I said I was going to call the police, and one of them said, "They will just laugh at you". He was right, so everyone in the area all laughed and I rode my bike home.

 

I'm not saying hiding a geocache on the land is good, but I am saying I can see where the confusion is coming from.

Edited by Coldgears
Link to comment

This is not always true. In California it is an infraction to enter any land that is fenced, or properly posted without fencing, without regard to whether you are asked to leave. It can rise to a misdemeanor or more if you remain on land after being asked to leave.

The key word is UNKNOWNGLY.

 

This means, if it is posted private property, or there is a fence, you could not have not knowingly entered private property. At least, with a fence there you'd have a hard time convincing the Judge you didn't.

 

Actually, in my state, "knowingly" is not part of the statute. It is a general intent crime, meaning that if you pass around a fence or properly posted property (which is defined as three to a mile, so you could simply miss it) you could be prosecuted. In Illinois (which was cited as an example) all it takes is for a sign to be conspicuously displayed at the main interest - that sign constitutes adequate warning that you should not be there, so if you disregard it for whatever reason you are knowingly trespassing.

 

It is important to check out property boundaries before placing a cache. The recent incident in California, a geocacher was shot because the property owner happened to have a gun and be willing to use it. He was acquitted of that shooting, although convicted of assaulting two others who were unharmed. The property boundaries were clearly displayed on the google maps listed on the cache page. If you are unsure, think twice before placing a cache or take the time to find out.

Edited by geodarts
Link to comment

This is not always true. In California it is an infraction to enter any land that is fenced, or properly posted without fencing, without regard to whether you are asked to leave. It can rise to a misdemeanor or more if you remain on land after being asked to leave.

The key word is UNKNOWNGLY.

 

This means, if it is posted private property, or there is a fence, you could not have not knowingly entered private property. At least, with a fence there you'd have a hard time convincing the Judge you didn't.

 

Actually, in my state, "knowingly" is not part of the statute. It is a general intent crime, meaning that if you pass around a fence or properly posted property (which is defined as three to a mile, so you could simply miss it) you could be prosecuted. In Illinois (which was cited as an example) all it takes is for a sign to be conspicuously displayed at the main interest.

 

Knowingly is actually a more strict word.

 

Let me explain.

 

Knowingly entails both a fence or properly posted property, as you would have to knowingly trespass if you saw these. This makes it just as strict as the well defined law.

 

However, what leaving "knowingly" out of the vocabulary means, if you were to trespass knowingly, AND there was no private property signs (You saw the boundaries on a map, or you had someone tell you it was private property) you could theoretically trespass and get away with it by that definition.

Link to comment

 

Knowingly is actually a more strict word.

 

Let me explain.

 

Knowingly entails both a fence or properly posted property, as you would have to knowingly trespass if you saw these. This makes it just as strict as the well defined law.

 

However, what leaving "knowingly" out of the vocabulary means, if you were to trespass knowingly, AND there was no private property signs (You saw the boundaries on a map, or you had someone tell you it was private property) you could theoretically trespass and get away with it by that definition.

 

I do not want to argue, but the statute I quoted does not require any specific intent. Again it is a general intent crime. If you miss a sign that was posted three to a mile or bushwhacked where there was no trail, you could violate it. Period. No other intent or knowledge is required. (Cal. Pen. Code section 602.8).

 

In Illinois, the statute is violated if you "enter upon the land of another, after receiving, prior to such entry, notice from the owner or occupant that such entry is forbidden." The notice is a conspicuous placed sign at the main entrance. No other notice is required under the terms of the law (I have not taken time to research case law).

Edited by geodarts
Link to comment

Just taking a guess here, but is this the cache in question?

http://coord.info/GC35EJQ

 

We found about half of these caches today, and plan to cache that area again tomorrow. This one was not one we found today, and knowing the nearby landowner's feelings, will be deleted from our list for tomorrow. Whether the gentleman in question is correct or not regarding the law, it bugs him. On the slip of paper that can be printed from the Groundspeak website and placed in a regular sized cache, there is some statement to the effect that "if there any problems, please contact (cache owner's name) to fix it." Knowing those rural roads, I can see why some of the folks out there might not be happy with the sudden increase in traffic.

 

It looks like slbens was the first finder of this cache, not the placer. I'm sure the people who placed these caches did so in good faith, and I'm guessing they'll address the issue once they know about it.

 

Personally we don't love caches right near someone's home, unless the cache owner lives there, but others may roll differently. We just returned from a long road trip that involved lots of 5 mile plus hikes with large altitude increases, so the easy caching today was welcome. We just aren't as young anymore as we'd like to think. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

 

Knowingly is actually a more strict word.

 

Let me explain.

 

Knowingly entails both a fence or properly posted property, as you would have to knowingly trespass if you saw these. This makes it just as strict as the well defined law.

 

However, what leaving "knowingly" out of the vocabulary means, if you were to trespass knowingly, AND there was no private property signs (You saw the boundaries on a map, or you had someone tell you it was private property) you could theoretically trespass and get away with it by that definition.

 

I do not want to argue, but the statute I quoted does not require any specific intent. Again it is a general intent crime. If you miss a sign that was posted three to a mile, you could violate it. Period. Again, it helps to know the rules.

That's exactly my point. If the signs are up correctly as stated in California Law you'd have to be blind not to see them. Keep in mind, if you are caught trespassing, even in a state that requires intent, you will have to PROVE your intent, otherwise anyone could say, "Oh well I didn't know I was trespassing", and the judge would say, "Oh you are free to go".

 

Thing is, if someone put up signs correctly as California states you are just simply not going to prove the judge that you did not knowingly do it.

 

Ask yourself this question... If you somehow managed to miss a sign and/or fence that stated no trespassing (Up to California's specification), and you were caught. Do you honestly think that the judge will believe you didn't mean to trespass? Or is it more likely the judge will say that you are lying and should have noticed the sign?

 

If you said it was more likely that the judge will think you are lying, do you think that the law is more strict because it means you get a fine if you knowingly trespassed but there were no trespassing signs (Or if they were they were not up to California's specifications.)?

Link to comment

Ask yourself this question... If you somehow managed to miss a sign and/or fence that stated no trespassing (Up to California's specification), and you were caught. Do you honestly think that the judge will believe you didn't mean to trespass? Or is it more likely the judge will say that you are lying and should have noticed the sign?

 

If you said it was more likely that the judge will think you are lying, do you think that the law is more strict because it means you get a fine if you knowingly trespassed but there were no trespassing signs (Or if they were they were not up to California's specifications.)?

 

It would not matter if the judge believed you did not know you were trespassing because you were bushwhacking in search of a cache and missed seeing the sign, because knowledge is not an element of the crime and lack of knowledge is not a defense. Of course, I doubt that very many cachers (if any) would actually be prosecuted under the statute, which only subjects you to a $70 dollar fine (or so) in any event. In most cases, including the example I cited above, the angry property owner simply yells at you for awhile. Unless he is a crazy old guy with a gun.

Edited by geodarts
Link to comment

Ask yourself this question... If you somehow managed to miss a sign and/or fence that stated no trespassing (Up to California's specification), and you were caught. Do you honestly think that the judge will believe you didn't mean to trespass? Or is it more likely the judge will say that you are lying and should have noticed the sign?

 

If you said it was more likely that the judge will think you are lying, do you think that the law is more strict because it means you get a fine if you knowingly trespassed but there were no trespassing signs (Or if they were they were not up to California's specifications.)?

 

It would not matter if the judge believed you did not know you were trespassing because you were bushwhacking in search of a cache and missed seeing the sign, because knowledge is not an element of the crime and lack of knowledge is not a defense. Of course, I doubt that very many people (if any) would actually be prosecuted under the statute, which only subjects you to a $70 dollar fine (or so) in any event. In most cases, including the example I cited above, the angry property owner simply yells at you for awhile. Unless he is a crazy old guy with a gun.

Excuse me for being a .5 mile from the city guy on the east coast. But why would the property owner be on the land. Most of the, "private property" here is land bought for future use, such as cemeteries (when they run out of space) or industrial plants (When they need to expand). I really can't see why someone would sit on the property with a gun. Heck, I've never seen someone Open Carry... In my whole life... And I live in an Open Carry state.

Link to comment

Excuse me for being a .5 mile from the city guy on the east coast. But why would the property owner be on the land. Most of the, "private property" here is land bought for future use, such as cemeteries (when they run out of space) or industrial plants (When they need to expand). I really can't see why someone would sit on the property with a gun. Heck, I've never seen someone Open Carry... In my whole life... And I live in an Open Carry state.

 

With the OP, the cache was near the property owner's house. With the California case, where the owner shot at a group of cachers, he lived on the property, although the cache location was on a rocky unposted hillside above him. With the cache placed behind a fence near where I live in California, the owner happened to be driving the road at the wrong time -- and it did not matter to him that you could get to the cache by climbing over rocks and avoiding the fence. I suppose he saw a car parked there and decided to check it out.

Edited by geodarts
Link to comment

The recent incident in California, a geocacher was shot because the property owner happened to have a gun and be willing to use it. He was acquitted of that shooting, although convicted of assaulting two others who were unharmed. The property boundaries were clearly displayed on the google maps listed on the cache page. If you are unsure, think twice before placing a cache or take the time to find out.

 

I suspect there is a lot more to that story than your short paragraph infers. To use your own words:

 

It can rise to a misdemeanor if you remain on land after being asked to leave.

 

It can "RISE" to a misdemeanor if you remain on posted land, yet you can be shot and the shooter acquitted? This isn't adding up to me. You can be shot for less than a misdemeanor?

Link to comment

In Illinois as with most states, a person is guilty of trespassing only after they have been notified and given the opportunity to freely leave the property. The state code says a person is guilty of trespass only when he/she:

 

  • "enters upon the land of another, after receiving, prior to such entry, notice from the owner or occupant that such entry is forbidden;" or
  • "remains upon the land of another, after receiving notice from the owner or occupant to depart."

The key point here is that generally in the US, it is not illegal to enter private land. It is only illegal to enter or remain knowingly, after having been notified. s:

 

This is not always true. In California it is an infraction to enter any land that is fenced, or properly posted without fencing, without regard to whether you are asked to leave. It can rise to a misdemeanor if you remain on land after being asked to leave. Even in Illinois, you can violate the law if "written notice forbidding such entry has been conspicuously posted or exhibited at the main entrance to such land or the forbidden part thereof." Therefore, a notice at the entrance will be deemed sufficient to provide you warning even if you enter by another way. And of course if you enter into an agricultural field or orchard . . .

 

It can be important to know the rules. A nearby cache was placed on private property, behind fenced land that was posted in part. I decided not to look for it in light of the above law. But other cachers did. Neither the cache owner or the reviewer took any interest in the problem, but it was archived after a run in with the angry property owner. Luckily, no one was arrested.

 

 

The Legal Definition of "Trespass" in California

California Penal Code 602 PC (and its related sections) penalize over 30 acts that constitute criminal trespassing.3 These acts include anything from taking oysters from another's land to avoiding or refusing screening at an airport or courthouse.

 

The most common acts that California trespassing laws prohibit are:

 

  • entering someone else's property with the intent to damage that property,4
  • entering someone else's property with the intent to interfere with or obstruct the business activities conducted thereon,5
  • entering and "occupying" another's property without permission,6 and
  • refusing to leave private property after you've been asked to do so.7

Edited by knowschad
Link to comment

It can "RISE" to a misdemeanor if you remain on posted land, yet you can be shot and the shooter acquitted? This isn't adding up to me. You can be shot for less than a misdemeanor?

 

You can be shot for anything. Whether the person is guilty for shooting is another matter. In this case, the property owner allegedly had been bothered by drug addicts and thought that they were returning. Which does not completely explain why he continued to shoot after the cachers had turned around (according to their testimony). But he was acquitted of the actual shooting (causing great bodily injury) and one of the other assault with a firearm charge. He was found guilty of two other counts of assault involving the adults with the group and should be sentenced in a few weeks. I suppose it was a compromise verdict, but I also look upon it as a great job of lawyering.

 

Section 602, which you cited, is a misdemeanor. Section 602.8 is an infraction, perhaps because it is more serious to be trespassing after you are asked to leave.

Edited by geodarts
Link to comment

It can "RISE" to a misdemeanor if you remain on posted land, yet you can be shot and the shooter acquitted? This isn't adding up to me. You can be shot for less than a misdemeanor?

 

You can be shot for anything. Whether the person is guilty for shooting is another matter. In this case, the property owner allegedly had been bothered by drug addicts and thought that they were returning. Which does not completely explain why he continued to shoot after the cachers had turned around (according to their testimony). But he was acquitted of the actual shooting (causing great bodily injury) and one of the other assault with a firearm charge. He was found guilty of two other counts of assault involving the adults with the group and should be sentenced in a few weeks. I suppose it was a compromise verdict, but I also look upon it as a great job of lawyering.

 

Of course! I can be shot for playing my stereo too loud. I can be shot for walking down the wrong street at the wrong time. I can be shot because I walked into a convenience store as its being robbed. What is your point? It is not legal to shoot somebody for simply wandering onto posted land, whether in California or Wisconsin.

Link to comment

Actually, in my state, "knowingly" is not part of the statute. It is a general intent crime

 

An infraction, by definition, is NOT a crime. Accusing someone of a crime, where they may be imprisoned or heavily fined, entitles that person to a whole range of rights that can be expensive and complicated. Hence, for very minor acts that involve small fines and no imprisonment, states have been given the latitude to define non-criminal infractions. In return for small fines and no criminal record, citizens give up some rights such as a right to a jury trial. Infractions, if contested, go to a bench judge and appeals beyond that bench judge are extremely rare. In California you have to trespass onto the SAME owner's property THREE times before it becomes a crime, even if done knowingly.

Link to comment

I'd say the CO needs to clearly spell out where the cache is not in his geocache profile to prevent this situation. Anything less is careless.

 

I found that this type of situation happens in my area a lot. Generally these geocaches get removed; unfortunately it always seems to happen by the same CO (bad apple) placing these caches without permission.

 

CAN'T Groundspeak STEP IN AND REVOKE THE CACHE OWNERS RIGHTS TO PLANT FUTURE GEOCACHES IF THIS BEHAVIOR PERSISTS? OR WOULD THAT HURT THE SPORT WORSE THAN UNINTENTIONAL TRESPASSING BY UNKNOWING GEOCACHERS.

 

I'd advise you to take this thread with a grain or three of salt, until more details emerge.

 

I totally agree! We need to hear the property owner's version of events. Can somebody get him a Forum Login/Password?

Also, I would like to read this police report, can it be posted here? Along with any photos?

Edited by TorgtheViking
Link to comment

Just taking a guess here, but is this the cache in question?

http://coord.info/GC35EJQ

 

We found about half of these caches today, and plan to cache that area again tomorrow. This one was not one we found today, and knowing the nearby landowner's feelings, will be deleted from our list for tomorrow. Whether the gentleman in question is correct or not regarding the law, it bugs him. On the slip of paper that can be printed from the Groundspeak website and placed in a regular sized cache, there is some statement to the effect that "if there any problems, please contact (cache owner's name) to fix it." Knowing those rural roads, I can see why some of the folks out there might not be happy with the sudden increase in traffic.

 

It looks like slbens was the first finder of this cache, not the placer. I'm sure the people who placed these caches did so in good faith, and I'm guessing they'll address the issue once they know about it.

 

Personally we don't love caches right near someone's home, unless the cache owner lives there, but others may roll differently. We just returned from a long road trip that involved lots of 5 mile plus hikes with large altitude increases, so the easy caching today was welcome. We just aren't as young anymore as we'd like to think. :rolleyes:

 

Looks to me like it might be the cache talked about in this thread, it certainly seems to fit what has been mentioned about it.

 

Edit: Considering the logs by Not Welcome, I sent a message to the reviewer that published the cache telling them they might want to look into that. I also included a reference to this thread.

Edited by EdrickV
Link to comment

Should the cache owner have researched the ownership of the property?

 

Yes. Absolutely.

 

Should the reviewer who published the cache have researched the ownership of the property?

 

Yes. Absolutely.

 

Should the property owner put up a few signs (or even a fence...maybe) if they don't want people wandering around on their property?

 

Yes. Most certainly.

 

Does anyone have any business questioning how I spend my leisure time or disposable income?

 

No.

+1

 

Releasing the hounds on a woman is not very manly. At the very least just make it known that she is on private property and that you'd like her to leave. Most people will respect that. I have wooded property in Oklahoma and wouldn't care is someone was hiking through it, but that's just me.

Link to comment

I will have to say that without knowing more about the location I won't want to pick sides...

 

From the Cache owners side, land ownership is not always particularly obvious - there are often public paths bordering property that are commonly used by the public, where you would expect to be on public land, and end up accidentally trespassing. Walk down one of those with your dog every day and you wouldn't think twice about the ownership of the land before placing a cache, perhaps on the path, perhaps straying a bit further into the private land before placing it. Certainly a cache owner should be doing their research first, but if there are no signs or markings to show where you have wandered from (known) public land into private, how many would think to probe further?

 

On the other hand I have no idea what the area is actually like - if the land is marked as private, or if the cache owner approached it form a weird way or was just pushing his luck with the placement I can't say. I will certainly agree that I wouldn't want unknown peoples skulking around on my property without my express permission.

 

Even with legally placed caches, there has to be something said about consideration for local residents - I know I have gone to find caches at odd hours only to find them placed (legally) next to a solitary house a distance away from town. I certainly wouldn't be happy as that homeowner when my dogs start barking late at night after a car pulls up nearby with no explanation...

 

I am thankful that the vast majority of caches are well placed, legal and happy, sadly it only takes one poor cache to give us a bad reputation.

Link to comment

Just taking a guess here, but is this the cache in question?

http://coord.info/GC35EJQ

 

We found about half of these caches today, and plan to cache that area again tomorrow. This one was not one we found today, and knowing the nearby landowner's feelings, will be deleted from our list for tomorrow. Whether the gentleman in question is correct or not regarding the law, it bugs him. On the slip of paper that can be printed from the Groundspeak website and placed in a regular sized cache, there is some statement to the effect that "if there any problems, please contact (cache owner's name) to fix it." Knowing those rural roads, I can see why some of the folks out there might not be happy with the sudden increase in traffic.

 

It looks like slbens was the first finder of this cache, not the placer. I'm sure the people who placed these caches did so in good faith, and I'm guessing they'll address the issue once they know about it.

 

Personally we don't love caches right near someone's home, unless the cache owner lives there, but others may roll differently. We just returned from a long road trip that involved lots of 5 mile plus hikes with large altitude increases, so the easy caching today was welcome. We just aren't as young anymore as we'd like to think. :rolleyes:

 

Looks to me like it might be the cache talked about in this thread, it certainly seems to fit what has been mentioned about it.

 

Edit: Considering the logs by Not Welcome, I sent a message to the reviewer that published the cache telling them they might want to look into that. I also included a reference to this thread.

 

That certainly sounds like the cache in question. It took someone who was in the area caching to find it, I certainly wasn't going to read every cache page in town. Yes, it sounds like Not Welcome has the cache, and the reviewer needs to know pronto.

 

Also explains the rant many found kind of out of line in the OP about wasting gas driving around finding these things all day, seeing as it's a roadside micro with a cache page that invites throw-downs. :o

Link to comment

Funny that Not Welcome logged a find, hehe. Obviously not familiar with the county, but drainage ditches and roads being privately owned. Maybe there should be signs stating that the road is a private road.

 

LAWL. He's no longer a muggle. He claims public property 25 feet from the center of the road on each side. That's just what he says, and I doubt he's been admitted to the bar in Wisconsin though. Google Sat view shows that cache in the road, but there is a log that says they found coordinates to be 55 feet off.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...